Ask Question
HistoryHistory
21 January, 18:26

Why would historians prefer primary sources over secondary sources?

+3
Answers (1)
  1. 21 January, 21:56
    0
    Primary sources told an account of what actually happened because they were recorded from the actual event itself/saw the actual event

    secondary sources (like our textbooks) arent 100% accurate because they are based off of the primary sources
Know the Answer?
Not Sure About the Answer?
Get an answer to your question ✅ “Why would historians prefer primary sources over secondary sources? ...” in 📙 History if there is no answer or all answers are wrong, use a search bar and try to find the answer among similar questions.
Search for Other Answers
You Might be Interested in
Buddhism entered China during what time period?
Answers (2)
When "bell-bottom" pants became fashionable in the 1970s, the demand curve for bell-bottoms
Answers (1)
In what year did france fall to thee nazis
Answers (1)
Because of his involvement in a variety of areas, this famous American from Pennsylvania is said to demonstrate the spirit of enlightenment. A. John Locke B. George Washington C. Benjamin Franklin D. Johnathan Edwards
Answers (1)
Which was one major consequence of Archdukes assassination?
Answers (1)
New Questions in History
Only about blank of Texans families were slave owners
Answers (1)
Roosevelt and Churchill met with Stalin for the first time at the December, 1943, Allied meeting in what city?
Answers (1)
How many people lived in the aztec capital when it was at the height of its culture?
Answers (1)
What where the positives and negatives of reaganomics?
Answers (1)
Why did Europeans continue to stay interested in Africa after the slave trade was ended? A. They wanted to establish healthy societies for the sake of the Africans. B. They wanted control of the natural resources of the continent. C.
Answers (2)
Home » History » Why would historians prefer primary sources over secondary sources?
Sign Up Forgot Password?